Let me give an example of an idiomatic use of zou in modern Chinese. If you are playing instruments together and one person loses the thread and stops playing, he is said to zoudiao. We would say in our own idiom that he got lost, or perhaps that he 'wandered off', the last I think being preferable as translation, because it conveys something of the force of zou in Chinese. Though it is true that often idioms cannot be translated literally.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by JerryKarin:Louis, I think I agree with everything you are saying, but mostly what you have said rationalizes how 'yield' could work in this spot; it does not make the case that zou means 'yield' in Chinese. It's a technical term for which there is no good match in English, so whatever you use is a compromise. I simply find the root meaning of zou to be awfully far from yield, so I am not too satisfied with it.</font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

And I agree with you, Jerry. While zou does not mean "yield," I think that yielding is implicit in, or a requisite component of zoujin. It's a tough nut to crack as far as finding a good English equivilant.

It's clear that for someone who is advocating yielding, I can be pretty stubborn. I yield the floor for now!

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by JerryKarin:<B>Let me give an example of an idiomatic use of zou in modern Chinese. If you are playing instruments together and one person loses the thread and stops playing, he is said to zoudiao. We would say in our own idiom that he got lost, or perhaps that he 'wandered off', the last I think being preferable as translation, because it conveys something of the force of zou in Chinese. Though it is true that often idioms cannot be translated literally.

[This message has been edited by JerryKarin (edited 08-31-2008).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Now you've lost me! This doesn't seem too helpful, as wandering off and getting lost would not be a good way of dealing with a taiji partner.

In the jazz idiom, if the other musicians follow a good "walking" bass line, no one gets lost.

I have a couple of Chen Weiming’s books in Chinese. One is a mainland edition of his complete works, _Chen Weiming Taijiquan yizhe huibian_, published by the Renmin tiyu chubanshe. I got it from Jarek Szymanski in China. As I recall, we did a trade; I sent him a John Lee Hooker CD he wanted. The other is a Taiwan edition, _Taijiquan jiangyi dawen hebian_ published by Wuzhou chubanshe. I bought it at Eastwind Books in S.F.

Barbara Davis translated Chen Weiming’s sword book, _Taiji Sword and Other Writings_ (2000, North Atlantic Books), and a study of the classics, _The Taijiquan Classics: An Annotated Translation_ (2004, North Atlantic Books), which includes her translation of Chen Weiming’s commentary on the classics, as well as the Chinese text of the same. Barbara is also the founder and editor of “Taijiquan Journal” (no longer in circulation).

Take care,Louis (just Louis) </B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Mr.Louis (just to 'shun' your yi, respectfully) Thank you for all the information. I was in SF for two weeks to take care a friend who had eye operation about 7 months ago.( she rided of her Cadillac for a Lincoln. that was what she saids.)She lives on top of Greenwich St. where cable car stop before the great descent toward chocolate factory. From there I did my Taiji walk almost daily to the China Town for a bowl of Won ton noodle and rest my two foot at the East Wind book store for couple of hour before I ascent to a realization why the SF Cable car is so uniques! unfortunately I didn't find what I have in mind. I guess it could labeled as 'Bu (not) shun yi". My timing was not match when the book is there, So I can not be apply "shun hand" to pick up a Chen Weiming's book. This was certainly a disadvantage to "make my day" come true for a one-stop-shopping. That means I need to "again 'zou' once more". But this time I use my fingers do the walking (phone first) before I send my body there...Maybe that is what my teacher trying to tell me? "use your mind,go outside your body". He is not only has a hand full of skills but also mind full of cleverness.Go out side. So simple!why so hard?

I will look into Amazon maybe, for Barbara Davis' book. Thanks billion !

“To quick movements, I respond quickly. To slow movements, I follow slowly. Although the transformations have innumerable strands, this principle makes them as one thread.”

These lines continue the theme of the preceding lines about hard/soft, attack/withdraw, and elaborate that, even with regard to the speed of my movement, I should respond to and follow the initiative of the opponent. The allusion to the Analects line “There is one thread that runs through my dao (way)” adds rhetorical weight to this statement of principle, reiterated further down in the treatise by the Mencius quote “give up your self and follow the other”—presented as the “foundation” of the art. The “one thread” quote was often discussed among Neo-Confucian thinkers of the Song, Ming, and Qing eras, underlining perhaps the strong influence of Neo-Confucian thinking in taiji theory.

With regard to the ‘speed and slowness’ lines, one of the more interesting commentaries I’ve seen on this section is the one that appears in Yang Chengfu’s early book, _Taijiquan shiyongfa_ (Application Methods of Taijiquan). It is not clear to me who the author of this commentary was, but it could have been Dong Yingjie. Wile translates it in _T’ai-chi Touchstones: Yang Family Secret Transmissions_:

“At present most of my fellow T’ai-chi practitioners understand the art of yielding [rou hua] but do not understand the method of quick response. I am afraid they would fare badly against external stylists. ‘Speed’ means quickness; ‘slowness’ means to be deliberate. If the opponent approaches slowly, I respond with yielding and following (rou hua gen sui). This principle is very clear. If the opponent comes at me with great speed, how can I use yielding [rou hua]? In this case, I must respond by using the method of T’ai-chi ‘intercept energy’ [jiejin], and the principle of ‘not late and not early’ [buhou buxian]. It is just like concealing troops in ambush to intercept the enemy. What do we mean by ‘not late and not early?’ When the opponent has already launched his attack, but has not yet landed, I intercept his arm with my hand before it becomes straight. This will immediately deflect the attack. This is how to repulse a frontal attack [ying tou tong ji]. Without receiving the true transmission, ‘responding to speed with speed’ is impossible.”—Wile, p. 119; Yang, Shiyongfa, p. 109.

The term jie is likely taken from late imperial military terminology, but I haven’t found evidence of its use in early bingfa. To those of us who grew up on John Wayne westerns, it can be recognized in the oft-repeated maxim, “We’ll head ‘em off at the pass.”

Just a quick trivia note regarding the term jiejin (intercept jin) appearing in the commentary above. As I mentioned, jie is used in military strategy for intercepting or "cutting off" advancing forces. It also appears in the name of the martial art founded by Bruce Lee, Jeet Kune Doo (jie quan dao), the art of intercepting fist.

Re: “I think it’s probably an interlink between the preceding prescriptive lines and the following introduction to the more primary concept of JIN.”

I think that’s a compelling idea. I definitely agree that the line about the many strands being made one thread is a transition between the preceding few lines and the following passage about the progressive stages of learning. I tend to think it is more of a summing-up statement referring to the idea of responding and following than an introduction to the next section, but you may be right. What makes it difficult to know with certainty is the lack of any sort of pronouns that may point one way or the other, and the ambiguity about whether “li” refers to a principle or a set of principles. Again, I think the ideas of responding and following in the preceding lines are supported by the “give up yourself and follow the other” line further down. Some commentaries mention that here, suggesting a link to that phrase as “the foundation,” hence the pervasive principle.

Still, the possibility that the “one thread” introduces the development of jin is interesting. In his Answers to Questions, Chen Weiming is asked what the difference is between zhuo (techniques) and jin. He replies, “The zhuo are the methods of transformation (bianhua zhi fa). Jin simply operates through the zhuo. There are myriad [variations of] zhuo, but there is only one jin. No matter what the zhuo, there is but the one jin; it is just that the intention varies at the time of application. Therefore the jin also complies with it and changes accordingly.” See: http://martialart.giss.ncpes.edu.tw/taichi95/books/B1929AW0/B1929AW00048072.jpg

A stronger argument might be made, though, that the opening and closing “threading” statements in the “Taijiquan Jing” have to do with jin and integrative movement—that the body “must be threaded together (guan chuan),” and “the entire body is threaded together joint-by-joint (jie jie guan chuan). The "one thread" line in the text we're discussing here, however, is talking about the underlying principle (li) of the art, which is a topic separate and distinct from jin, in my view.

Other thoughts?

--Louis

Thanks to the the great site Gu Rouchen discovered, I've added a link to the page from Chen Weiming's _Answers to Questions_ from which I translated the above quote.

Let me start from a brief look into TCMA history. I'd like to make two points about the period when neijia started to emerge. I presume that - first, neijia was somewhat different from the styles that were derived from Shaolin monastery with its Buddhism teaching as a base for inner development since not every Buddhists community knew the Daoists methods. And the second ¨C at the beginning neijia styles were most probably quite close to each other, sharing main methods.

Since both - shaolin styles and neijia styles have inner practice and develops what we may call "inner strength" - what then was the difference? Apparently it was in some principle of the practice. And that principle I guess almost all neijia styles had as common at that time.

So in my book - not a jin makes neijia unique in the first place, LI (principle) makes neijia unique (and then jin). Though nowadays this difference often (but not always) is almost gone, because different styles have been interchanging of their methods through the long history of cma.

So what kind of styles were neijia at that early period? In its application - when the primary way to protect yourself was still a weapon and physical labor was necessary part of life - they must be able to develop some kind of strength. Strength that could operate with weapons and tools with quite a weight sometimes.

Let me summarize - strength is LI - 力 . And neijia's LI is different from waijia's one. The difference is in the principle LI - 理. Then taking LI ( 力 ) as a base JIN had been developing. What's the difference between LI and JIN? JIN unlike LI can go beyond the body, can be issued.

Just mho

[This message has been edited by Yuri_Snisarenko (edited 09-05-2008).]

He moves fast I respond quickly,He moves slowly I follow slowly.Although the permutations are infinite,yet they are arranged into a single thread.

I take 理 li here as in 理髮 'arranging hair' ie cutting hair or styling it. (Xie Bingcan once remarked to me: 你从来没有理过髮!) Li not only means the pattern (as in grain of jade) but also to arrange in a pattern, to order.

Just to avoid confusion among Western Readers: Must distinguish between jie1, jie2, and jie4: receive/accept; cut-off, intercept; borrow.

It is important to remember that Taijiquan is unique from other martial arts in that it is a "Jie4-jin4 gong1fu",-a martial art that 'borrows' the opponent's energy-

The opponent pushes on the bubble, and it either pops or expands back against the push.

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Louis Swaim:<B>Just a quick trivia note regarding the term jiejin (intercept jin) appearing in the commentary above. As I mentioned, jie is used in military strategy for intercepting or "cutting off" advancing forces. It also appears in the name of the martial art founded by Bruce Lee, Jeet Kune Doo (jie quan dao), the art of intercepting fist.